527 F. Supp. 498 - Cabais v. Egger’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3301 (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 3304 (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 42 U.S.C. § 503 (§ 303 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)
Relies on Dandridge v. Williams · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · City of New Orleans v. Dukes · Vance v. Bradley · Nixon v. Administrator of General Services
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The amount of compensation payable to an individual for any week which begins after March 31, 1980, and which begins in a period with respect to which such individual is receiving a governmental or other pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity, or any other similar periodic payment which is based on the previous work of such individual shall be reduced (but not below zero) by an amount equal to the amount of such pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity, or other payment, which is reasonably attributed to such week, except that— (A) The requirements of this paragraph shall apply to any pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity, or other similar periodic payment only if— (i) such pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity or similar payment is under a plan maintained (or contributed to) by a base period employer or chargeable employer as determined under applicable law, and (ii) in the case of such a payment not made under the Social Security Act or the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974, (or the corresponding provisions of prior law), services performed for such employer by the individual after the beginning of the base period (or remuneration for such services) affect eligibility for, or increase the amount of, such pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity or similar payment, and (B) The State law may provide for limitations of the amount of any such reduction to take into account contributions made by the individual for the pension, retirement or retired pay, ann”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[T]he amount of compensation payable to an individual for any week which begins after March 31, 1980, and which begins in a period with respect to which such individual is receiving a governmental or other pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity, or any other similar periodic payment which is based on the previous work of such individual shall be reduced (but not below zero) by an amount equal to the amount of such pension, retirement or retired pay, annuity, or other payment, which is reasonably attributable to such week . . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““(1) providing uniform minimum state standards for disqualifying income; (2) providing an administratively convenient method of determining and excluding from unemployment compensation persons who are no longer in the labor force; (3) preserving the corpus of state unemployment insurance funds; and (4) preventing an employer from paying two forms of benefits — retirement and unemployment compensation — to the same employee.” 527 F. Supp. at 502 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.